General Coach Candidate News

[Chris007 44,066]

11 minutes ago, AZ Hoosier said:

nope... just the usual bickering and sniping... #Bwahahaha

What breaking news do you have for us?

Spouses are exhausting. Is that breaking news or old news?

[Zachetology 282]

21 minutes ago, TadQueasy said:

I think we have a misunderstanding of innovative.  

None of that is innovative.  That stuff has been around awhile.  

We need to be smarter as a fanbase.

Numerous stats have existed for numerous years. Innovation comes from emphasis. In baseball, on-base percentage had existed for a long time. The Moneyball movement was an emphasis on getting on base over other traditional statistics. In basketball, the Moneyball movement is going to be an emphasis on efficiency.

People who think they are geniuses quote KenPom and brag about how efficient an offense or defense is. The actions of most coaches, however, show that they don't understand the strings that pull the puppet of efficiency. The strings are shot selection.

This regular season, for the 68 teams in the NCAA Tournament, here are some numbers to consider. I will list the total field goal percentages and points per shot for the 68 teams at the rim, from midrange, and from long range.

AT THE RIM: FG% (58.8%), Points Per Shot (FG% x value of shot; in this case 58.8% x 2; 1.18)

MIDRANGE: FG% (38.8%), PPS (0.78)

LONG RANGE: FG% (35.3%), PPS (1.06)

The meaning of this: every time a team takes a midrange shot, that team is giving away a minimum of .28 points. If a team takes 100 midrange shots over a three games, that team has given away a minimum of 28 points. Does that sound valuable to you? 

Alabama was the only team this year to attempt less than 10% of its shots from midrange and no one else was close. Nate Oats is Billy Beane. He may not win the World Series, but the next dozen teams that do will do it from stealing his philosophy. I believe it is worth it to make an aggressive financial play to be a leader in college basketball rather than live in the past, in more ways than one. 

[AKHoosier 6,923]

53 minutes ago, iu eyedoc said:

That is just nonsense logic. In 2018-19, the last regular NCAA season 17 of the top 25 had .800 or better winning percentages, NBA teams...0. Comparing theNCAA to NBA numbers on any level is just stupid.

Brad Stevens career winning percentage in the NBA?  .564    Why did we want that bum leading IU to 17-13 every year? Dodged a bullet there.

Just look at the numbers before and after he was with both teams.  He was the high water mark for both of those teams with the core rosters he had.

And you have it backwards, if he had gone to Penn St or UVA, he wouldn't be interested in this recent sinkhole of a college coaching job, the whole reason an accomplished NBA coach is even interested in the job is his ties and love of the university.

And again, who gives a isht about his recognizability as a former IU player. If you don't think him walking in a recruits home and mentioning how he reminds him of his former players Carmelo Anthony, Blake Griffin or Chris Paul your delusional.

I am not arguing he is the grand prize, but he also isn't the flaming bag of cr@p some of you are making him out to be.

Awesome, glad you're excited about the prospect of hiring him and not having to put yourself through exhaustive mental gymnastics to get on board.

Just ask yourself one question, and you can lie if you want to: If Purdue had a vacancy and was set to hire Mike Woodson, and assuming you want our hated rival to fail, how would you feel about their chances of doing so?

And for the record, I'm not trying to make him into a flaming pile of crap. If we hired him, we would probably be pretty average.

I thought by firing Archie, we're trying to be better than average for once.

[IUCane 173]

4 minutes ago, Chris007 said:

To me that was IU is only paying 3.5 million for the next coach and if we have to pay more than that the booster will cover it. 

And the Booster has to like said coach as much as BtownBanners does :).   Boosters obviously liked Stevens but we don't know who else??  

[Iubravos 327]

52 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Musselman was 20-12 last year at Arkansas which was Archie's record last year.  So we are talking about Musselman over one great year at a power 5 conference.

He has 1 great year out of 2. Look at his record at Nevada. Archie has 0 great years out of 4 with better recruiting facilities.  Give me Musselman all day and it's not close. If you don't trust in Mussel, just wait in 5 years when he is a top 3 coach in college year after year with success. He is the real deal. That's who we need to go after 100% all in. 

[IU Prof 862]

I'm a big Oats fan. He was building a monster at Buffalo, and has hit the ground running at Alabama. The MAC tends to play a more physical style of ball, similar to the B1G, so I believe his style would translate to IU.

My concern is, if you are Oats, why sign a new contract with a big buyout a few weeks ago if you are interested in IU. He had to know the job could come open, and that a $12 million buyout would hamper his negotiating leverage should IU reach out. 

[Hoosierfan2017 21,432]

5 minutes ago, AKHoosier said:

Awesome, glad you're excited about the prospect of hiring him and not having to put yourself through exhaustive mental gymnastics to get on board.

Just ask yourself one question, and you can lie if you want to: If Purdue had a vacancy and was set to hire Mike Woodson, and assuming you want our hated rival to fail, how would you feel about their chances of doing so?

And for the record, I'm not trying to make him into a flaming pile of crap. If we hired him, we would probably be pretty average.

I thought by firing Archie, we're trying to be better than average for once.

I would be as giddy as a school girl in that situation. Purdue’s fanbase probably feels exactly like that right now with the rumors swirling. 

[IU Scott 2,375]

16 minutes ago, AZ Hoosier said:

Exactly... saw a piece on William Shatner the other day... the dude is 90 years old and is still riding horses every day... he looked like a guy in his early 60s, seriously.

Look at  sister Jean she is 101 and still going strong

[Moye > Boozer 241]

4 minutes ago, Zachetology said:

We need to be smarter as a fanbase.

Numerous stats have existed for numerous years. Innovation comes from emphasis. In baseball, on-base percentage had existed for a long time. The Moneyball movement was an emphasis on getting on base over other traditional statistics. In basketball, the Moneyball movement is going to be an emphasis on efficiency.

People who think they are geniuses quote KenPom and brag about how efficient an offense or defense is. The actions of most coaches, however, show that they don't understand the strings that pull the puppet of efficiency. The strings are shot selection.

This regular season, for the 68 teams in the NCAA Tournament, here are some numbers to consider. I will list the total field goal percentages and points per shot for the 68 teams at the rim, from midrange, and from long range.

AT THE RIM: FG% (58.8%), Points Per Shot (FG% x value of shot; in this case 58.8% x 2; 1.18)

MIDRANGE: FG% (38.8%), PPS (0.78)

LONG RANGE: FG% (35.3%), PPS (1.06)

The meaning of this: every time a team takes a midrange shot, that team is giving away a minimum of .28 points. If a team takes 100 midrange shots over a three games, that team has given away a minimum of 28 points. Does that sound valuable to you? 

Alabama was the only team this year to attempt less than 10% of its shots from midrange and no one else was close. Nate Oats is Billy Beane. He may not win the World Series, but the next dozen teams that do will do it from stealing his philosophy. I believe it is worth it to make an aggressive financial play to be a leader in college basketball rather than live in the past, in more ways than one. 

Just piling on my near ravenous Nate Oats fandom ------ I actually would prefer him so much more than Muss because I don't want the guy that jumps on the table and says "look at me" after victory ---- I want the guy that tells the other team "get the **** outta here".

Again, I know I've mentioned that dang article 15x now, but having read that article BEFORE IU fired Archie, then listening to Dolson's presser, I thought "holy smokes, Dolson must've read that article" because Nate Oats is the exact coach he is talking about (at least the exact TYPE of coach).

[goonaha 2,972]

21 minutes ago, IU Prof said:

I'm a big Oats fan. He was building a monster at Buffalo, and has hit the ground running at Alabama. The MAC tends to play a more physical style of ball, similar to the B1G, so I believe his style would translate to IU.

My concern is, if you are Oats, why sign a new contract with a big buyout a few weeks ago if you are interested in IU. He had to know the job could come open, and that a $12 million buyout would hamper his negotiating leverage should IU reach out. 

You sign a new big contract because you are happy at Alabama and all that it offers, and are not interested in Indiana. 

[8bucks 6,455]

8 minutes ago, IUCane said:

And the Booster has to like said coach as much as BtownBanners does :).   Boosters obviously liked Stevens but we don't know who else??  

This is unfortunately such an important part of this process.  And if Btown Banners was a booster we no doubt would have an opinion on who that should be.  In the end, some targets Scott may have thought about may have been eliminated because they did not line up with the boosters wish list.  

I have my preferences but if someone else is chosen I will watch like I did this year.  Occasionally but always hoping to switch back to must see TV if they provide a product that I like.  

[ap2345 7,877]

1 minute ago, AZ Hoosier said:

You said "vehicle" (not "vehicles")... did they leave together or just at the same time?

You should reread that

[IU Scott 2,375]

I am sorry for being a little edgy earlier but I am and older passionate IU fan.  I just want IU to get back to the top of the big ten and competing nationally.  I also would love to see this fan base get back to what it was once was and that is everyone is behind the program.  The last 20 years it has been so fragmented and to me this doesn't help the program in any way.  I know we each have certain criteria we want in our next coach and some won't be happy whoever is the next coach is.  I did not like the Archie hire because I really wanted Greg Marshall.  I also backed Archie after the hire and gave him 4 years to judge the hire.

[Chris007 44,066]

1 minute ago, AZ Hoosier said:

You said "vehicle" (not "vehicles")... did they leave together or just at the same time?

They drive the same kind of car. Windows are tinted. Not sure which one it was

[Hoosierfan2017 21,432]

Dolson better make a good hire if he wants fans to pack assembly hall next season. Iu fans aren’t going to show up to watch Mike Woodson coach us to a 12-20 record like they did Crean.  

[IU Scott 2,375]

22 minutes ago, Zachetology said:

We need to be smarter as a fanbase.

Numerous stats have existed for numerous years. Innovation comes from emphasis. In baseball, on-base percentage had existed for a long time. The Moneyball movement was an emphasis on getting on base over other traditional statistics. In basketball, the Moneyball movement is going to be an emphasis on efficiency.

People who think they are geniuses quote KenPom and brag about how efficient an offense or defense is. The actions of most coaches, however, show that they don't understand the strings that pull the puppet of efficiency. The strings are shot selection.

This regular season, for the 68 teams in the NCAA Tournament, here are some numbers to consider. I will list the total field goal percentages and points per shot for the 68 teams at the rim, from midrange, and from long range.

AT THE RIM: FG% (58.8%), Points Per Shot (FG% x value of shot; in this case 58.8% x 2; 1.18)

MIDRANGE: FG% (38.8%), PPS (0.78)

LONG RANGE: FG% (35.3%), PPS (1.06)

The meaning of this: every time a team takes a midrange shot, that team is giving away a minimum of .28 points. If a team takes 100 midrange shots over a three games, that team has given away a minimum of 28 points. Does that sound valuable to you? 

Alabama was the only team this year to attempt less than 10% of its shots from midrange and no one else was close. Nate Oats is Billy Beane. He may not win the World Series, but the next dozen teams that do will do it from stealing his philosophy. I believe it is worth it to make an aggressive financial play to be a leader in college basketball rather than live in the past, in more ways than one. 

To me al of this has really hurt the offense in the college game.  To me the best shot to take is the open shot and I don't care it it is 1 ft, 10 ft or 22 ft.  It is funny that using this strategy over the years in college that scoring as a whole has went down and shooting percentage is down as well.

[RaceToTheTop 25,837]

49 minutes ago, Chris007 said:

Been gone for a few hours miss anything?

Stewart in transfer portal.

I think if we wait AND don’t make a top hire, it crushes us for a couple of years.

[Chris007 44,066]

1 minute ago, brumdog45 said:

Stewart in transfer portal.

I think if we wait AND don’t make a top hire, it crushes us for a couple of years.

But we should be used to that by now

[MikeRoberts 7,013]

3 minutes ago, Hoosierfan2017 said:

Dolson better make a good hire if he wants fans to pack assembly hall next season. Iu fans aren’t going to show up to watch Mike Woodson coach us to a 12-20 record like they did Crean.  

I don’t think that is true at all. There are some coaches that have built in enthusiasm like a Steven’s but IU fans have filled the hall for every coach on day one and Woodson would be no different.

I think he would have a short rope though, needing to show progress right away to every jerk from saying i told you so 3 games in.

 

woodson could do well, needs a great recruiting staff

[IU Scott 2,375]

Just now, MikeRoberts said:

I don’t think that is true at all. There are some coaches that have built in enthusiasm like a Steven’s but IU fans have filled the hall for every coach on day one and Woodson would be no different.

I think he would have a short rope though, needing to show progress right away to every jerk from saying i told you so 3 games in.

 

woodson could do well, needs a great recruiting staff

If anyone wants to give their tickets up give them to me